Alternative to 70-200mm f/4 IS

I have a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS but don't use it enough to justify its weight when traveling. I'm tempted to replace it with an f/4 IS but I'd have to sell the 2.8 to do so. Are there other options I could consider that might allow me to keep the 2.8 as well ?
I have a 18-135mm kit and will be replacing my 100-400 mk1 with a Sigma 150-600mm C.
I'm primarily thinking of travel/wildlife in Alaska, Yellowstone, etc and my main body is a 70D. Second body is SL1.
Thanks,

Steve.

55-250 stm

SteveInNZ wrote in post #18266475
I have a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS but don't use it enough to justify its weight when traveling. I'm tempted to replace it with an f/4 IS but I'd have to sell the 2.8 to do so. Are there other options I could consider that might allow me to keep the 2.8 as well ?
I have a 18-135mm kit and will be replacing my 100-400 mk1 with a Sigma 150-600mm C.
I'm primarily thinking of travel/wildlife in Alaska, Yellowstone, etc and my main body is a 70D. Second body is SL1.
Thanks,

Steve.

Steve.
Do you have the 70-200 f/2.8. L IS Mark II or Version 1?

Thanks. I hadn't even considered the 55-250mm. Are there any 3rd party lenses to consider and how would they compare optically with the 55-250 STM ?

Nick5, I have the Mk1 version.

Steve.

Another vote for the 55-250 stm lens, i took mine with me to Australia last year, i found it ideal for pretty much everything.

SteveInNZ wrote in post #18266475
I have a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS but don't use it enough to justify its weight when traveling. I'm tempted to replace it with an f/4 IS but I'd have to sell the 2.8 to do so. Are there other options I could consider that might allow me to keep the 2.8 as well ?
I have a 18-135mm kit and will be replacing my 100-400 mk1 with a Sigma 150-600mm C.
I'm primarily thinking of travel/wildlife in Alaska, Yellowstone, etc and my main body is a 70D. Second body is SL1.
Thanks,

Steve.

Steve. A bit of history.
In 2009 I wanted to buy the Canon 70-200 L IS. Either the f/2.8 L IS Version 1 or the newly introduced f/4 L IS.
Since there were rumors of a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II on the horizon, the f/4 became more and more of a possibility. Plus the f/4 L IS was producing cleaner, sharper images as it had improved technology. It was really taking the "Sales" out of the f/2.8 L IS Version 1. The Mark II would really have to show improvements to beat the f/4, of course minus the difference of the additional stop. So for less money, less weight and improved optics, I chose the f/4 L IS. Beautiful lens. Loved it.
A bit later the f/2.8 L IS Mark II was introduced. It was a huge improvement over the Version 1 as Canon had to "Par"or "Birdie" and beat the f/4 L IS in terms of color sharpness etc...
So I bought the newly introduced f/2.8 L IS Mark II. Wow!
So for a few years the f/4 sat in the corner waiting to see the light of day. I was not in a hurry to sell it anyway. One day when I knew that f/2.8 was not needed while shooting an event and th lower back a bit tight, I decided to put the f/4 L IS to work to lighten the load......What a difference in terms of weight........in terms of image quality suffering.....Hell no. To this day I still have both and I let the job dictate which is needed. Shooting with Soeedlights or strobes hand held all day, why put a load on the 53 year old body.
I terms of travel, unless I know I am going to Italy or Greece where I am shooting the the most Iconic of all subjects, I am now going to the 70-200 f/4 L IS as my go to to lighten the load on my shoulder and in my shoulder bag.
So comparing the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Version 1 to the f/4 L IS, I whole heartedly recommend grabbing the wonderful, smaller, lighter improved optics and Image Stabilization, the Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS provides.

Charlie wrote in post #18266580
55-250 stm

The 55-250 STM is a very nice budget lens, but its not in the same league as the 70-200 f/4 L IS USM.

SteveInNZ wrote in post #18266993
Thanks. I hadn't even considered the 55-250mm. Are there any 3rd party lenses to consider and how would they compare optically with the 55-250 STM ?

Nick5, I have the Mk1 version.

Steve.

If you have a 70-200 f/2.8 I doubt you'll be very happy with the 55-250 STM

I went through a very similar dilemma about a year back concerning the 70-200 f/2.8, whether or not I needed the bulky zoom and it's f/2.8. Nick5 weighed in on my thread too In the end, I kept the f/2.8 because it's a fantastic lens, but I also resigned myself to the fact that it's just too bulky and reach-limited for travel usage. It is a studio/portrait/photoj​ournal lens that doesn't leave the house all that often, but when it does, it delivers.

The first thing you need to address is what you are going to do with the 70-200 f/2.8: do you absolutely need to sell it to fund your next purchase, or are you looking to hold onto it and add another lens?

Next, you already have a Sigma 150-600 coming that will take care of your wildlife needs, but I take it you won't be traveling with it for the same reasons you don't travel with the 70-200?

That will make your lineup look like this:

18-135
70-200 f/2.8
150-600

So, that leaves you wanting a lens dedicated to 1) travel 2) wildlife. Here's the thing about going with another 70-200: when you aren't traveling, will it get enough use? Also, I feel that the 200mm long end falls well short of what you'd need for wildlife, but since you didn't tell us exactly what kind of wildlife, I could be wrong (birds vs. elephants, for example).

Depending on your budget (i.e. do you sell the 70-200) I'd go with either the above-suggested 55-250 STM, or the 70-300L, over the 70-200 f/4. Good comparison: http://dancarrphotogra​phy.com …review-vs-70-200-f4-l-is/

If someday I stumble upon a lot of money and vacation time, and start traveling a lot (none of which are likely), I'd globe trot with a 16-35 f/4, 50mm prime, and the 70-300L.

Thank you all for the well considered replies.
It looks like buying a 55-250 STM is a no-brainer for me. They are selling here for about the same as a 50mm f/1.8 plus a filter, so I can get that and keep the 70-200 f/2.8 for when I'm close to home. The 55-250 is light enough that it will go well in the backpack with the SL1 when I'm hiking so it will never be useless. I'll spend some time with it and see if it does all I need.

The 150-600 is definitely for traveling with. That's where the wildlife is.

Steve.

SteveInNZ wrote in post #18269948
Thank you all for the well considered replies.
It looks like buying a 55-250 STM is a no-brainer for me. They are selling here for about the same as a 50mm f/1.8 plus a filter, so I can get that and keep the 70-200 f/2.8 for when I'm close to home. The 55-250 is light enough that it will go well in the backpack with the SL1 when I'm hiking so it will never be useless. I'll spend some time with it and see if it does all I need.

The 150-600 is definitely for traveling with. That's where the wildlife is.

Steve.

Are you saying it's selling new for about the same price as a EF 50mm f/1.8 STM? I find that hard to believe. In the US, the 50mm f/1.8 STM is selling new for $125 USD, The 55-250 STM sells for for $299 USD. That's almost two and a half times as much. I don't know how that translates to NZD but I suspect the ratio is similar. If you are talking about a used copy or a non STM copy than maybe, but otherwise similar pricing between these two lenses doesn't make sense.

I am. Local online NZ$195 for the 50mm STM, NZ$260 for 55-250 STM, NZ$56 for Hoya 58mm UV filter. Bricks & Mortar store is closer to your 1:2 ratio.
Maybe it's old stock or something. Whatever. It's on its way.

Steve.

SteveInNZ wrote in post #18270266
I am. Local online NZ$195 for the 50mm STM, NZ$260 for 55-250 STM, NZ$56 for Hoya 58mm UV filter. Bricks & Mortar store is closer to your 1:2 ratio.
Maybe it's old stock or something. Whatever. It's on its way.

Steve.

Hmm. According to Canon New Zealand's website the EF 50mm f/1.8 has a list price of $249 NZD and the EFs 55-250 STM has a list price of $549 NSD. I would be very wary of someone selling that lens for only 47% of its retail price. Are you sure that its new? Are you sure that its the STM version? Even the more trust worthy online grey market sellers don't give the stuff away at prices like that. The market may be different in NZ, but that price for that product sounds very suspicious.